Paul Arveson responded to Dean Ohlman as follows:
> I'm inclined to agree with Dean here, that political biases and motives seem to
> count more than data when it comes to political or economic issues. This is
> even true among groups of (presumably) informed and devout persons. If so, it
> means that scientific research is futile. It means that discussion is futile.
> If there is no objectivity, all discussion of such topics is a waste of time.
> I will therefore offer only one plea: that everyone try to examine the evidence
> objectively with no regard for political or economic implications. Draw
> conclusions based only on standard statistical tests with 95% confidence limits,
> as is standard practice in research. Let the chips fall where they may.
I was getting completely discouraged. It seemed to me that Seitz was
wrong because he didn't know how consensus reports are handled, because
he referred to the economy, because he was associated with the wrong
organization, because summary statements he quoted were wrong summaries (the
IPCC report wasn't needed; everyone knows the opposite of those statements
is true), and on and on. All this from, of all people, *Christian*
In view of all this, it seemed to me that the dispassionate look at
the evidence suggested by Loren Haarsma would be impossible.
e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Home address:
Russell Maatman 401 Fifth Ave. SE
Dordt College Sioux Center, Iowa 51250
Sioux Center, Iowa 51250 Home phone: (712) 722-0421